What’s the consensus on this film. I’ve seen it and have some definite thoughts, but wonder just how minority opinion they are.
Who has seen this and what did you think?
Second rate chick flick. Read the book, forget the movie.
I wouldn’t say it was a 2nd rate flick. I thought it was a pretty good. Parts of it were predictable, parts not so much. Every time they showed some happiness, I couldn’t feel happy, I just felt dread because I knew that meant something bad was going to happen. Finally, I thought Renee Zellweger stole the show. I loved her role.
E3
I loved Rene Z, I agree she stole the show. I found the violence in the movie to be just too gory. It got to the point where it was just violence for violence’s sake.
It was an okay film.
Word ftg. Think Titanic in the civil war which meant I fucking hated it.
Relied too much on exaggeration, cliches, and overdrawing emotion. The lead guy was boring as hell and I cared nothing about him, Kidman’s character acts like an 8th grader in love, they couldn’t make the soldiers (especially those evil northerners, try to free slaves, you bastards!) if they cooked and ate babies (which they kind of almost do, well, not really but if you’ve seen it you know what I mean), and characters were thrown in and out just for emotional factor.
In short, it sucks. Big time.
I meant to say they couldn’t make the soldiers look any more evil if they cooked and ate babies. And yes, I know I singled out the portrayal of Northerners but I’m not forgetting about the Home Guard, before anyone brings that up. I just don’t count them as soldiers.
It was depressing enough without my having to go see it on Christmas night.
Oh well, I didn’t know what I was getting into. Of course the scenery was great and I don’t mind looking at Jude Law, but there was just one dark, depressing, gloomy, gory and violent thing after another. Renee Z. was the only light in the long, dark tunnel. (“Well, if you two are just gonna wimble-wimble all night…”)
Great cast, mediocre movie. It was Hollywood formula to the max. You could have stopped the movie at any point, turned up the lights and asked the audience, “What’s going to happen next?”, and almost everyone would know the answer. Renee Z definitely stole the show, probably a best supporting actress nomination coming her way. I would save a couple bucks and wait to rent the DVD, if you think you really need to see this movie, when in fact, you really don’t.
Although I like both Nichole Kidman and Jude Law, I thought they were both horribly miscast in Cold Mountain.
Renee Zellwegger and Phillip Seymore Hoffman most definitely stole every scene they were in in and I thought that was a brilliant casting move, but it still didn’t make up for Nichole Kidman and Jude Law.
I thought that the scene with Natalie Portman and her baby was the best scene in the entire movie. It seemed to be a scene out of a completely different movie though, and I kept wondering throughout the rest of the movie what happened to the poor girl and her baby (even though I’d already read the book).
Overall, I’d say the movie was a very poor representation of the book, although it sure was pretty to look at.
Damn it. I spent last night on the real Cold Mountain. Carry on.
Yes, that was a good scene, wasn’t it? And although I haven’t seen much from Natalie Portman since “The Professional,” she was a surprise in this, and brought an emotional intensity to that scene which made me realize what had been lacking the whole time. It sure makes up for those dreadful “Star Wars” CGI showcases that she found herself in.
Is there anything further that happens to that character? Can we get a spoiler on this one?
I thought the central love story was bland as can be. And Nicole Kidman seemed way too old for the part. The supporting cast saves the movie though.
I posted a lengthy review of Cold Mountain in this thread. It fell off the front page before the movie opened (I saw an advance screening). Short summary of my writeup: Eh. It’s good, but not as good as the filmmakers apparently believe it to be. The central thematic concept is interesting, but ill-suited for the screen. Anyway, if you’re interested, my (very) long critique is in the linked thread.
Hated it. Hated, hated, hated it. Too much pointless and unredeemed suffering. I realize war is hell, but a war movie doesn’t have to be. I walked out after 2 hours, which is something I don’t think I have ever done. I wasn’t too fond of The English Patient and really disliked The Talented Mr. Ripley, so maybe this is one director who is just not for me. I think all of these could have used some serious editing.
I kept wondering why the acrobatic albino didn’t have to go fight in the war insead of being in the Home Guard. I mean, he looked young and healthy.
OH and about that Nat Portman scene.
Why didn’t Inman take one of the three horses that were left by the Yankees? He kept on walking after that.
Oh well the Odessey (of is the Illiad, I get them confused) doesn’t translate that well to the American Civil war.
Renee Z did not steal the show. She simply showed up. There was no show to steal.
So I basically didn’t like it.
Let me be the nth person to say that Natalie Portman, even more than Renee Z, absolutely steals the movie.
Perhaps she’ll actually have a decent script to work with in Star Wars, Episode 3? Or is that an impossible dream?
I am relieved that I am not the only one who walked out of that movie exasperated. I agree with Brynda that there was too much unredeemed suffering. I just couldn’t handle the way Inman went out, so close to realizing his dream. Don’t the filmmakers see what a cliche that is?
Personally, I kind of wished that Inman had stayed with Natalie Portman’s character. By far that was the best part of the movie. I liked Renee Z but her story line seemed to be there for comic relief, which was sorely needed but hardly essential.
Overall, what I got out of this movie was that Jude Law is extremely hot. I mean, I knew that he was hot, but now I know he’s extremely hot. Not what I expected to get out of it, but it’s something.
Is the book much better than the movie? I would read it, but I don’t want to go through all this again if the book is close to what I saw onscreen.
The movie was much the same as the book, and Inman dying was my big problem with the novel–the book contained beautiful prose, but the ending felt to me that the author had no idea what to do with Ada and Inman, so off went Inman into the void. Cervaise’s link offers some thoughtful commentary about the Ada/Inman non-relationship.
And yeah, I don’t usually go for blondes, but Jude Law is a hottie.
I read Cold Mountain several years ago, when it was still on the best-seller charts. At the time, I felt that the main appeal of the book wasn’t actually the story, but the style. The author managed to capture the 19th century idiom so perfectly that it almost came as a surprise that it hadn’t been written in 1865. Even in historical fiction, that’s a rare quality, particularly when the story is not told in first person.
I’m sure I’ll go see the movie eventually, as I tend to like chick flicks. And I loved The English Patient. I guess I’m the only guy I know who did.
I got dragged to this utter garbage as well.
Tell me one more time about the differerent kinds of journey’s we all make through our lives . . . get the fuck a-way, already. A more shallow, empty premise I can’t imagine. Thank goodness it was underlined so many times in so many ways . . . this is a journey, that’s a journey, this is a different knid of journey, and so is this, children!
And that Zellwigger chick does not do walking-on-my-toes, hands-on-hips Tom Boy at all well – I thought she was straight out of seven brothers for seven brides (or whatever that’s called). Overacting does not constitute show-stealing, it constitutes cliched, stereotypical ham.
A film designed and planned by the Brothers Weinstock and whats is face to win awards and just utter drivel from start to end.
God help me.